51–60 of 165 posts
The author compares Greenland to Puerto Rico, seeming to make the assumption that if somebody made a good offer, America would happily sell Puerto Rico. Can any other Americans speak to the truth of this? It seems absurd to me that a country would happily sell off a territory and make a whole bunch of citizens non-citizens just for the financial benefit. Are Puerto Ricans not Americans? Do americans really view Puert…
The author compares Greenland to Puerto Rico, seeming to make the assumption that if somebody made a good offer, America would happily sell Puerto Rico. Can any other Americans speak to the truth of this? It seems absurd to me that a country would happily sell off a territory and make a whole bunch of citizens non-citizens just for the financial benefit. Are Puerto Ricans not Americans? Do americans really view Puert…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not just that your math is ridiculous (as you acknowledge), it doesn't make any sense. Greenland has almost no economy, a mere $2.7b in GDP, and few assets. You can't use negative $22 trillion as the basis with the US while ignoring the $110 trillion in household wealth and massive corporate & government assets (stacked against $50t-$55t in total debt between household + corporate + government). That's the part…
But if someone find diamond in the dark side of the moon, would you sell USA or just al to evil communist for money. Would you sell your homeland?
>Would you sell your homeland?
What does it mean for the USA to be my homeland? My family has been here for centuries but the government is working more for "new Americans" than those of us who built the country. In that sense my homeland has been given away without my consent.
Could you imagine if there was a decision to sell part of Michigan that included Detroit to Canada?
This got me thinking about "things that were once okay but today are totally unpalatable." In this case, selling land occupied by citizens. Could you imagine if there was a decision to sell part of Michigan that included Detroit to Canada?
Wild idea: I think we should turn Greenland into an into a new frontier nation with completely open borders for refugees and people who are up for the challenge of settling a new place. Sure, there's nothing there, but if you want to build something and there's nowhere else for you, have at it. EDIT: Out of curiosity, I started looking at Greenland on Google Maps and found this sweet shadow of the buggy they used to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alaska is much warmer. Only a few sheltered coastal bays on Greenland can sustain any trees at all. Meanwhile, Sitka and Ketchikan often enjoy snowless winters. This is due, I believe, to the Aleutian ridge blocking the transport of cold water from the Arctic (contrast with the Labrador current).
Don't you think using two points along the narrow strip of land at the southwestern tip of Alaska as indicative of the overall Alaskan climate is just a wee bit dishonest?
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_Alaska
National territory has a psychological and strategic value that cannot be bought and sold. Countries have gone to war over infinitesimally tiny pieces of land (Gaza, Falklands, Northern Ireland)... we do not need to look to a crystal ball to see why Denmark holds onto a gigantic landmass like Greenland.
Agreed. Greenland is 836,300 mi², while Denmark is 16,577 mi². Imagine the effects of climate change in 200+ years - Greenland could be VERY valuable and important then.
National territory has a psychological and strategic value that cannot be bought and sold. Countries have gone to war over infinitesimally tiny pieces of land (Gaza, Falklands, Northern Ireland)... we do not need to look to a crystal ball to see why Denmark holds onto a gigantic landmass like Greenland.
Yeah. As much as I respect gwern, I think here they’re underestimating the importance of the human aspects like national pride.